From bloodhound-dev-return-853-apmail-incubator-bloodhound-dev-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org Fri Oct 5 07:54:12 2012
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-bloodhound-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org
Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-bloodhound-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3])
by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5F7D2DBC9
for ; Fri, 5 Oct 2012 07:54:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 27089 invoked by uid 500); 5 Oct 2012 07:54:12 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-bloodhound-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 27051 invoked by uid 500); 5 Oct 2012 07:54:12 -0000
Mailing-List: contact bloodhound-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help:
List-Unsubscribe:
List-Post:
List-Id:
Reply-To: bloodhound-dev@incubator.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list bloodhound-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 26968 invoked by uid 99); 5 Oct 2012 07:54:11 -0000
Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136)
by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 05 Oct 2012 07:54:11 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=5.0
tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_NEUTRAL
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Received: from [209.85.223.175] (HELO mail-ie0-f175.google.com) (209.85.223.175)
by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 05 Oct 2012 07:54:05 +0000
Received: by mail-ie0-f175.google.com with SMTP id c13so3251872ieb.6
for ; Fri, 05 Oct 2012 00:53:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=google.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:sender:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date
:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type
:x-gm-message-state;
bh=wTde3kJwXsnSYe+rHmkBmKlYsQItf6GvykhToGH9s18=;
b=YAteJLzejgiz3fETsYTac0fCzXDlt0QDq3jCIWJyGAoT79W168zqiKjLOxYBnFF6RT
Qa7F2sE15O1+OT+paysWrEraVw8s3PB+D24P26tSK7tAKvcjq3OmoF6WHnihQ6/XU9/9
vwNZPld/WIU1tDYTI1vJeHV94Pd8BFaBjuw44OjvEg8NnFyFcvaMMiP6jHCWwVMFtY23
JhMuIh0KJJM50qSFHtMlnRn7XD4Vk8ctlw4Te767wSM7Ni9GAscNTinvOEu+h5jseV67
7TQw0XGF9bHfddic5/J00vHrBD/w+vLyp4MPbrwNEIdzl9kPUTo2/QrDfexXZglF9vzE
xnuw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.50.189.200 with SMTP id gk8mr403110igc.65.1349423624249; Fri,
05 Oct 2012 00:53:44 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: peter@xlii.si
Received: by 10.64.41.99 with HTTP; Fri, 5 Oct 2012 00:53:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [188.196.23.143]
In-Reply-To: <506DA300.4010002@wandisco.com>
References: <506DA300.4010002@wandisco.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 09:53:44 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: scXHQs6nABag6yAAoUxXsviobh0
Message-ID:
Subject: Re: dashboard ticket query ordering
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Peter_Ko=C5=BEelj?=
To: bloodhound-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae9340859c65f6a04cb4b2bcb
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmY6C63IaFVs7Z7g+D7p2O+b3UZmPM/6s/ywCPax6ok/mnRnwrltDxdQLvGr6tkwOrtPsuO
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org
--14dae9340859c65f6a04cb4b2bcb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
If we are only talking about ordering, why not just enhance the widgets so
that if the user clicks on a column title, that is the field that the
results are sorted by? What is in dashboard definition would only be the
default then.
In to long run we need user configurable dashboard as well as user
configurable widgets.
Peter
On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Gary Martin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As I understand it, we want the dashboard view to show a list of tickets
> that is likely to be interesting to the viewer. In order to focus in we
> will probably need additional plugins for watched tickets, ticket due dates
> and so on. However, given that these plugins could be turned off or
> ignored, we should probably already be looking at making sure that we have
> a reasonable order for the tickets.
>
> At the moment the queries are in ticket created order and the main way
> that this is mitigated is that we have one list of "My Tickets" and one for
> "Active Tickets". I was wondering whether we could order the tickets by
> milestone due date while we don't have ticket due dates but this appears to
> require a custom report. Secondary ordering should probably be by ticket
> priority for the moment.
>
> Does this sound reasonable for now?
>
> Cheers,
> Gary
>
--14dae9340859c65f6a04cb4b2bcb--